Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 10
The teaching includes uncomfortable cases: not giving for drugs/cigarettes, but still giving even if someone might be lying (“Is not this the very method of divine goodness?”), plus the Popeyes story and William Law’s “indiscriminate charity” scandal; how do you decide between discernment and mercy in real encounters, and what safeguards (or risks) are you willing to accept if you take “measure…which I pray God never use towards me” seriously?
Another way to ask: When you meet someone asking for help, how do you balance being careful with being merciful, especially if they might be lying or waste it? What risks are you willing to take if you want God to treat you with the same mercy?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
The speaker holds both discernment and mercy together: he refuses to fund harmful choices (like drugs) but urges a generous posture that accepts the risk of being taken advantage of, because God himself gives broadly and we should not demand “merit” as the measure of charity.
- He addresses cigarettes/drugs directly: “Should I help…for cigarettes or drugs?…my answer would be…no.”
- Yet he challenges fear of deception: Miranda says giving to some who “do not deserve it” mirrors God, who gives sun and rain to “evil and…good…just and unjust.”
- He presses the heart issue: “Shall I withhold…for fear he should not be good enough…?…Shall I use a measure…which I pray God never use towards me?”
- He cites Scripture focus: “Where is the scripture made merit, the rule…?…if thine enemy hunger, feed him.”
- His practical safeguard example: in Dallas he wouldn’t give cash, but he would take the man to eat—he bought a “fried chicken dinner at Popeyes.”
- He shows the “risk” side in William Law’s life: their charity drew crowds and was denounced as “indiscriminate charity.”